Sergei Ivanov, who is in charge of defense industry these days, created a small stir when he said at a meeting of the Military-Industrial Commission yesterday that "in the foreseeable future the main goals of war will be achieved on account of air and space intelligence and strikes" and that Russia "must be ready for any scenarios of the development of events" (my thanks to NG for the link). The brief comments shown on TV apparently left the impression that Ivanov meant that Russia may be considering development of its own space-based weapons. That impression was reinforced by Ivanov's mentioning a new concept of development of air and space defense for the next ten years -- until 2016 -- which was recently approved by President Putin (on April 6, 2007, according to the reports). So, is Russia really getting into space-weapons business?

Probably not. I found a brief description of the concept published by Col.-General Boris Cheltsov, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, in February 2007. His version of the concept does not have anything that would hint at possible development of space-based (or anti-satellite) weapons. The emphasis is on integration of all defenses, early-warning, situation awareness, (mostly non-strategic) missile defense, and air-defense. Overall, the new concept seems to repeat the old story of air- and space-based systems playing increasingly important role in a military conflict and of the need to create an integrated air and space defense to counter those. So, I don't think the new space-defense concept includes any "strike" elements.

Not for now, anyway. Nothing in the concept seems to preclude development of this kind of systems either. The defense industry has a few old projects on its shelves and would love to get money to resurrect them.

Share

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://russianforces.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/442

Comments

The Strike element of new space based concept is inevitable if developments like deployment of ABM system continues and expand and countries like china goes ahead and deploy their Anti Satellite System.

Needless to say for ABM system to suceed space based element is very critical and if one can degrade the space element it automatically degrades the ABM system, and more ever US armed forces are so heavily dependent on Space element for any kind of combat that degrading it would be important.

They wouldn't like to publicly acknowledge that they are working/expermiting with the strike element, But its almost inevitable

It's a natural reaction based on the scenarios Russia is facing from the West, East and to the South. It also provides incentive for the Russian MIC to begin at least the elements of such systems to `project power' - I am glad she will not sit idly by while the `unipolar world' begins to disintegrate. Russia's pursuit of this in whatever way will help begin to protect the International Systems that check the `rogue power projection' demonstrated by the West and China, plain and simple!

Well, if 40N6 (the thing that rest to integrate into the S-400 because is still in testing stage) can reach a 150 km height it might be considered a space strike element. In addition, if the prospective S-500 will use a modernized model of the 9M82 from the S-300V, as rumoured, it will have a similar reach but with bigger accelerations.
Nothing near to the American GBI but the atmosphere will be placed well behind. A “near space” capability. The “old laser” resurrected? Well, so far rumours, but very insistent rumours. May be something is true.

China has developed a robust ground-laser development program that has been active in various anti-satellite tests. However, there has been little publicly said on its success. I seem to remember such efforts from the Soviet Union also. Did the Soviets prefect an anti-satellite laser weapon or did their research get that far?

There are considerations to resurrect Energia space delivery platform with up to 200 tons of throw weight. Back in the day it was developed to deliver laser weapon systems and Russian space shuttle.
I personally do not think we will see these plans realized, because as a banker I do not see how US can avoid a financial collapse around 2011-2016.

Frank, as far as is known, the lasers are able to blind/kill sensors. Not to destroy satellites (that’s the American objective). Such an objective will need much more power, specially to destroy a hardened warhead.
It is well known the Challenger incident of 1984. Off course, the Shuttle moved in a LEO. I don’t know the effective blinding range of such a laser but I assume is higher than a LEO altitude.

I think, to resurrect the Energia just for military purposes is simply madness. Enormous resources directed to a project with limited usefulness. No way! I strongly disagree. I think that’s ideas are just words.

1) True post-“baby boomer” retirement crisis is somewhere around 2030-47. Its not pension obligations but health care that will drive that bus.

2) The American economy is the most efficient in the world. We consume 25% of the world’s natural resources and produce 25% of the world gross product. If American use of resources increases 1% our economy responds with a 1% increase in world GP. As energy cost goes up or down, the American economy seems to adjust. We are fighting two wars and still adjusting to the loss of one of our 25 largest cities devastated by natural disaster and yet unemployment is low and the economy continues to grow. It’s pretty resilient.

3) It’s the falling dollar that is now fueling our exports. And, our soon to be largest trading partner China is poised to dump a couple trillion dollars back into our market economy to ensure a greater than 3% return on its investment. America is still the place to invest. The British and Dutch came in the 1970’s the Japanese in the 1980’s. The Arabs in the 1990’s and the Chinese are coming in the 21st century. Don’t count us out and sell short.

I haven’t read too much regarding any American plan to use laser technology to either mask satellites from the ground or to destroy them in orbit. Are you referring to anything specifically in your remarks? Thanks.

No Frank, I just know about ABL, the joint project with Israel to down unguided rockets and about some tests from the US Air Force. Not very much at all.
I assume some “SDI-type” work are being carried out. May be, if you know details of the American budget, you can tell something to us.

- It doesn't matter; the endless guerilla war in unpredictable and uncontrollable Middle East will finish any Empire, even enormous and economically effective.

Remember Soviet Union and Afghanistan...

- As to economical effectivity, - there's a good proverb in Russia: 'The most condensed darkness is just before a dawn'. US economy is very dynamic, not static, - just like a jet plane: today it's flies in the sky, tomorrow it's crushed...

Kolokol, Russian ... would it not be cheaper to revive the older Soviet ASAT system ... which is co-orbital, high conventional explosive with guided onboard radar. The early Russian ASAT had fragmentary discharge ... did it not? Could not the Progress ISS re-supply module be adapted for such a role or as a `test' system or does the legitimacy of such satellites prevent Russia via the `old Soviet pledge to ... not weaponize space first' pause a pursuit of such a role for something like the Progress module, which is tied to the development of the ISS by treaty or no ???

Ozzy, This co-orbital ASAT was discarded because of its conceptual obsolescence. Expensive, slow and not very efficient. Furthermore can work just on LEO. I think the chosen path is “blinding via laser”.

The ABL system has been fraught with cost overruns and technological failures. The project was first under US Air Force control but then moved by Congress to the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) because of lack of funding (and interest by the USAF). I think the technology is way, way early. However, the system is getting increased interest as a cruise missile defense system which is perhaps an easier “target” for the technology. (???) I suspect the ABL system will be in “research & development” for years to come.

In the largest nation in the world, Russia has a population of 140 million; less that half of the United States. The birthrate is declining (-0.848 estimate in 2007). The average life expectancy at birth is 73.03 years for a woman but only 59.1 years for a man. No one immigrates to Russia. Statistically, a healthy number of young Russians annually educate abroad and statistically few return home. There is a brain drain. In the next 30 years if this trend isn’t reversed, Russia will have less than 100 million citizens. By 2018, more than 50% of the conscripted Russian military will be Moslem. What Russia does have is 10,000 nuclear weapons and a trillion dollar “energy empire”. How it invests the bounty from this great national treasure will determine its future.

- Yes, we know about it. The land component will be the 'S-500' system, and a 'good old' laser-based system of late 1980s, may be used a space tier."

I'm not sure how effective that 80's laser would be. The US shot down TOW missiles with the MTU, Sidewinders with ALL, and Vandal supersonic missiles with MIRACL during the 70s and 80s, have demonstrated THEL and yet people are STILL skeptical. Sometimes I think one could deploy a planet buster laser and people like Coyle and his ilk would STILL say "it won't work". Personally though I'd think Russia would have a lot of ground to cover.

What technological failure has ABL had? Money has been an issue which hasn't helped things and while they are a year or two behind they seem to be overcoming the hurdles. Considering that something like ABL isn't a thing you can start and say with certainty "we WILL have met this goal by this day, that goal by that day, etc." I think they've been doing alright. I think you also have to consider that a big chemical laser is a PITA and they see solidstate lasers coming down the pike and nobody wants to sink billions into a dead end. The next ten years will definitely be interesting in the field of military lasers.

Essotrust:

No way on Energia and 200 tons. More like 150 and that was with the six strap-on configuration that was never been tested. May as well be talking about million-pound Novas.

- Second, - the problems you'll describe are really exists, but diminishes from year to year. You really need to live in Russia, to have a possibility to compare the life here in the 1990s and NOW. But, it seems, that western media still stuff people with the old stamps...

- So, the good advice: never underestimate Russia... And remember please, - 'The most condensed darkness is just before a dawn' ;-)

You are exactly right at my poor choice of words in regards to ABL. Not really “failures” but struggles to overcome obstacles. I think the technical issues, the PITA factors, have continually surprised the design team. Not just the complex chemical laser and target detection but even the basic system integration on the host Boeing 747. All have been greater challenges that once expected. Again, you’re right. It’s a complicated weapon system that Congress has never given up on and it will be interesting to watch the future and see what progress can be made.

Frank,
You are quoting extrapolated trends that were in place in the 90s. These trends have reversed. For q1'07 birthrate is up 9%. Russia is a 2d country globally net recipient of immigrants, mostly russian speaking educated immigrants from FSU states. As far as I know Russian Muslims are secular ones, like in Turkey, not like Saudi Arabia. Anecdotal evidence does not support brain drain trends either. It is quite attractive to work in Russia in my field. I have a colleague who left for a job in Russia that pays 500K in Euros with 13% tax. Financial sector grew 19% there in q1'07. Oil and gas grew only 0.3%. As far as I can see it is a broad based recovery. If current trends continue to be in place, Russian economy will take over Germany by 2010. The history has examples of such turnarounds, e.g. Germany between 1932-36.